Quick Links

Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA

The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.

Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Starcraft 2: No Lan Support

Posts

If the Lord of the Rings films had to be split into a trilogy, each part of which was ginormous, they need to fire their adaptation people and writers, since clearly previous renditions like the animated feature were only released as one.

Not that I'd compare Starcraft to Lord of the Rings, but that statement doesn't really say anything other than "LOL, get new people you clearly don't know what you're doing with your story and games."

To be fair, each one didn't tell a different side of the same (poorly written) story.

Stop the presses, a company figured out how to make more money! We must get this word out to the man on the street, such tyranny cannot go unpunished!

I don't have a problem with a company trying to make money. I have a problem with people who insist on believing that in this case Blizzard made this decision for the fans and they are not trying to increase their profits.

Stop the presses, a company figured out how to make more money! We must get this word out to the man on the street, such tyranny cannot go unpunished!

I don't have a problem with a company trying to make money. I have a problem with people who insist on believing that in this case Blizzard made this decision for the fans and they are not trying to increase their profits.

So far you haven't presented any reason other than "Because I say so". Fine corporations exist to make money, and shaft you, I can accept that as a premise.

Problem is when I said they might actually be telling the truth with regards to the story and gameplay, and gave my reasoning why, your response was largely to say "nuh-uh" and leave it at that.

If it wasn't originally a money grab, five bucks says it originated with the branching campaign structure they added into the game. It also may have had something to do with the idea to make each campaign radically different. (The Zerg campaign was described as like an RPG and the Protoss was described as more like an adventure game.)

Hooray someone gets it!

Just kidding they're going to sell you the game and it's just going to be Starcraft 1 with HDR and lens flare

I don't really care about the starcraft storyline, yet in order to gain access to the new units they include in SC2-2 and SC2-3, I am going to have to pay an inflated price which blizzard can pretend to justify with a shitload of shit I don't give a shit about

If it wasn't originally a money grab, five bucks says it originated with the branching campaign structure they added into the game. It also may have had something to do with the idea to make each campaign radically different. (The Zerg campaign was described as like an RPG and the Protoss was described as more like an adventure game.)

Hooray someone gets it!

Just kidding they're going to sell you the game and it's just going to be Starcraft 1 with HDR and lens flare

It shall be totally brown with oodles of Bloom. . . plus sex and metal riffs!

I don't really care about the starcraft storyline, yet in order to gain access to the new units they include in SC2-2 and SC2-3, I am going to have to pay an inflated price which blizzard can pretend to justify with a shitload of shit I don't give a shit about

You mean like Brood War?

EDIT: I mean most people that buy games never actually take them online, they buy them for the singleplayer content, and that's what Blizzard need to cater for. I mean crikey, Dawn of War 2 is ostensibly Relic's big focus as a multiplayer game, and Croak (Relic Dev. Or maybe it was one of the other Relic devs here.) estimated that only something like 10% would ever even start online. Bet you next expansion for DoW 2 is going to have a nice, big campaign alongside those multiplayer additions.

Look, if Blizzard really wanted to tell the entire story they'd have tiny little not-fifty dollar expansions. But they know how smart their fanbase is and they are capitalizing on that. It's good business sense.

If it wasn't originally a money grab, five bucks says it originated with the branching campaign structure they added into the game. It also may have had something to do with the idea to make each campaign radically different. (The Zerg campaign was described as like an RPG and the Protoss was described as more like an adventure game.)

Hooray someone gets it!

Just kidding they're going to sell you the game and it's just going to be Starcraft 1 with HDR and lens flare

I don't really care about the starcraft storyline, yet in order to gain access to the new units they include in SC2-2 and SC2-3, I am going to have to pay an inflated price which blizzard can pretend to justify with a shitload of shit I don't give a shit about

Protip: [strike]They still have not said how much each expansion is going to cost.[/strike] Each expansion will cost four hundred dollars.

The expansion sets will add new content to each race for use in multiplayer matches. This could include additions such as new units, abilities, and structures, along with new maps and Battle.net updates.

I'm just annoyed that, instead of needing one expansion to stay current and competitive, I'm already guaranteed to need at least two full-priced(most likely) games. I don't care about the single-player. I almost wish they'd release a fourth game which was only multiplayer that stayed updated...

Oh, well. I love Blizzard and Starcraft so I'll continue to be their bitch.

I figure that if any new units or whatever are added in campaign packs you will either get them for free or be able to buy the units only at a small price.

Why would they do that when they'll make more money by requiring you to buy the expansion packs? You're delusional if you really think that the game was split into 3 parts as a "service to the fans".

Or possibly that they really did have far too large a story and too much stuff to fit into the requisite 30 missions?

You see, unlike you I can't outright dismiss what they've said on that one, largely because like I said, previous releases have very easily been worth what they've been asking for. So I'm willing to wait and see whether that's actually the case here, and to be honest, I expect the answer is going to be the same as last time. If you feel that it's a rip off, then I can understand that, but I can't simply dismiss the COMPLETELY AUDACIOUS theory that they might be telling the truth and genuinely want to release three awesome products instead of one hamstrung game.

Well what do I know, I'm probably just corporate sheeple.

Exactly. They can charge whatever they want for their products and people will pay it because people are have so much faith in blizzard. Blizzard knows this. They could easily put it all into one game if they wanted to. They take their time when making games, why should this time be any different?

So, let's recap:

1 - You agree that people have faith in Blizzard.
2 - You agree that faith has been justified to date.
3 - It's been justified so far because Blizzard haven't half-assed any of their releases to date.

I'm not suggesting anyone go out and get the releases if they're crap or clearly not worth the asking price, but points 1, 2 and 3 seem to point at having just a teensy bit of patience here, don't you think?

No. I thought Warcraft 3 wasn't worth the wait at all, and it really seemed like it was created to cash in on the popularity of the franchise and pave the way for WoW. Would people find this(the splitting of the game into 3 parts) acceptable if it happened with any other RTS franchise? Probably not. Money is their utmost concern (they are a business after all) and what they're doing with Starcraft 2 seems to be an ill omen.

There is no possible way for Starcraft 2 to make as much money as WoW. If they only cared about money they wouldn't give a shit about Starcraft and just make more WoW stuff.

As it turns out Starcraft 2 is actually three elaborate expansions to WoW and you need to make sure you have WoW, all patches and expansions released and a subscription to WoW to play. That's in addition to the $400 dollars of course.

The expansion sets will add new content to each race for use in multiplayer matches. This could include additions such as new units, abilities, and structures, along with new maps and Battle.net updates.

I'm just annoyed that, instead of needing one expansion to stay current and competitive, I'm already guaranteed to need at least two full-priced(most likely) games. I don't care about the single-player. I almost wish they'd release a fourth game which was only multiplayer that stayed updated...

Oh, well. I love Blizzard and Starcraft so I'll continue to be their bitch.

I figure that if any new units or whatever are added in campaign packs you will either get them for free or be able to buy the units only at a small price.

Why would they do that when they'll make more money by requiring you to buy the expansion packs? You're delusional if you really think that the game was split into 3 parts as a "service to the fans".

Or possibly that they really did have far too large a story and too much stuff to fit into the requisite 30 missions?

You see, unlike you I can't outright dismiss what they've said on that one, largely because like I said, previous releases have very easily been worth what they've been asking for. So I'm willing to wait and see whether that's actually the case here, and to be honest, I expect the answer is going to be the same as last time. If you feel that it's a rip off, then I can understand that, but I can't simply dismiss the COMPLETELY AUDACIOUS theory that they might be telling the truth and genuinely want to release three awesome products instead of one hamstrung game.

Well what do I know, I'm probably just corporate sheeple.

Exactly. They can charge whatever they want for their products and people will pay it because people are have so much faith in blizzard. Blizzard knows this. They could easily put it all into one game if they wanted to. They take their time when making games, why should this time be any different?

So, let's recap:

1 - You agree that people have faith in Blizzard.
2 - You agree that faith has been justified to date.
3 - It's been justified so far because Blizzard haven't half-assed any of their releases to date.

I'm not suggesting anyone go out and get the releases if they're crap or clearly not worth the asking price, but points 1, 2 and 3 seem to point at having just a teensy bit of patience here, don't you think?

No. I thought Warcraft 3 wasn't worth the wait at all, and it really seemed like it was created to cash in on the popularity of the franchise and pave the way for WoW.

Well then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on Warcraft 3 then.

Would people find this(the splitting of the game into 3 parts) acceptable if it happened with any other RTS franchise? Probably not.

I'm not seeing what you're getting at here. If you're talking about only having one fully fledged side to play SP, then the Dawn of War series has already done that one. If it's about actually splitting into three, well if the content's there and it's of the high standard I'd hope for, then I don't have an issue with that either.

Money is their utmost concern (they are a business after all) and what they're doing with Starcraft 2 seems to be an ill omen.

An ill omen?

Look, kindly lay off the hyperbole, it doesn't add anything to the discussion. The issue ultimately is whether or not SC2 and what follows are going to be worth the money. I can't judge that now, heck I don't even know the pricing yet. Right now I'm willing to wait and see because so far I don't feel I've been shafted on any of their games, and so I'm more inclined to understand if the product needs to be split into three as long as each is awesome to play.

this is a terrible move imo. You should not have to be online to play LAN (if that even is the case). I'm sure Warforge/PvPGN will make an emulated battle.net server that can be setup (although warforge only supported war3 beta), so people CAN play on LAN. It seems so weird that Starcraft and War2 b.net edition were some of the few games that allowed installation of spawn copies so people could play LAN (or even online battle.net) without having the game. Now this goes completely against that and it is strange.

Also for the person talking about how Starcraft only supporting LAN through IPX protocol, this is incorrect. LAN through UDP was added in a patch so you do not need IPX protocol anymore (but is still a selectable option).

As far as the splitting thing goes, they had to do something to make up for the fact that you can now register your games online and redownload them instead of rebuying them over and over every time you decide you want to get back into them but can't find the disks any more.

Company of Heroes has a few campaigns and I remember only having to buy one game, not four. Just sayin'.

So where did Opposing Fronts and Tales of Valor disappear to then?

Yes, and SC1 had 3 separate campaigns, and instead, SC2 is going to have one large one the same size as the previous three, with a completely reworked campaign dynamic. Dawn of War 2 also had just one campaign, but it was a fairly in-depth campaign with re-worked RPG mechanics, and I never had issue with that either. IIRC even you liked it, although I might be wrong on that one.

Also, it's funny that you said that hyperbole didn't add anything to the discussion and went on about that for longer than the other two parts combined.

Meh, I was trying to say what I was thinking. Would you care to give me something more than just another sarky comment, and instead tell me directly what the problem is? Look, if I'm being uncivil or anything, then fine, let me know.

As far as the splitting thing goes, they had to do something to make up for the fact that you can now register your games online and redownload them instead of rebuying them over and over every time you decide you want to get back into them but can't find the disks any more.

Hah, are they actually doing this? I can't count how many times I rebought Warcraft II, Starcraft, Diablo, and Diablo 2. I swear those Blizzard games are designed to "teleport" back to home base so they can be resold.

Company of Heroes has a few campaigns and I remember only having to buy one game, not four. Just sayin'.

So where did Opposing Fronts and Tales of Valor disappear to then?

Yes, and SC1 had 3 separate campaigns, and instead, SC2 is going to have one large one the same size as the previous three, with a completely reworked campaign dynamic. Dawn of War 2 also had just one campaign, but it was a fairly in-depth campaign with re-worked RPG mechanics, and I never had issue with that either. IIRC even you liked it, although I might be wrong on that one.

Also, it's funny that you said that hyperbole didn't add anything to the discussion and went on about that for longer than the other two parts combined.

Meh, I was trying to say what I was thinking. Would you care to give me something more than just another sarky comment, and instead tell me directly what the problem is? Look, if I'm being uncivil or anything, then fine, let me know.

Uh, I didn't pay fifty for Opposing Fronts or Tales of Valor. If you did, you got ripped off. Sorry to hear that.

And I was just saying that I thought it was funny. I didn't notice that you were in super defensive mode.

I don't want to have to connect to the 'net in order to play a game with my flat-mate.

Screw them.

Rohan on June 2009

...and I thought of how all those people died, and what a good death that is. That nobody can blame you for it, because everyone else died along with you, and it is the fault of none, save those who did the killing.

As far as the splitting thing goes, they had to do something to make up for the fact that you can now register your games online and redownload them instead of rebuying them over and over every time you decide you want to get back into them but can't find the disks any more.

Hah, are they actually doing this? I can't count how many times I rebought Warcraft II, Starcraft, Diablo, and Diablo 2. I swear those Blizzard games are designed to "teleport" back to home base so they can be resold.